Tolle Points

2008-3-15 16:36:00

I am hesitant to add any more to this argument but perhaps if Dan sees I am making an effort here it may soften his feelings toward me.

Dan:

"So, am I to understand that you are now claiming that, specifically with the quotes you have given, the author makes no attempt to correct the very illusions you are accusing him of promoting?"

JJ:

I never said any such thing. Where he senses an area where the reader may question his statement then he will elaborate and I certainly did not have time to comment on all his elaboration. For instance he may say something that could lead you to think we should have nothing to do with the world, but then backtrack and explain that he understands that we must live in the world and deal with it the best we can.

He did this with good and evil and this was one subject where I found him to have more common sense with than I originally supposed but still there are teachings that don't harmonize with standard views on the subject. For instance the example of the guru who surrendered to the will of others in all things, Then in another place he makes the statement "ultimately nothing out here matters all that much."

He makes it sounds like he's teaching something like this. Yes, there is good and evil but nothing we do matters so in the end evil does not matter. Sometimes he sounds like its fine to let evil slide because the end is the same for us all no matter what we do now.

Dan:

"Except for the all the unsubstantiated claims you made concerning his name."

JJ:

I think you are the only one who believes this. Anyone who has read my post giving references to the name change should clearly see that what I said is well backed up. Does anyone else have a problem with this or am I in the "Twilight Zone" here?

Dan:

"That are listed in another post, here is a list of the defamatory claims you have made against this guy's teachings - the ones that I have taken the time to ferret out that is:

"(1) I do not dispute the fact that a reader of Tolle's book 'A New Earth' COULD come to some illusionary conclusions if he does not read with full attention and use judgment in application - but this is true of any teaching from any source including yours as you yourself have taught. Thus IMO, singling his teachings out as if a primary character of his teachings is an unjust indictment."

JJ:

I do not understand the accusation here. I have to single out teachings. It is impossible to comment on them all at once.

Dan:

"(2) I dispute your statements that indicate the author makes little or no effort to avoid such misunderstandings of his teachings."

JJ:

I have never made a black and white statement that he makes no effort to do this. He makes quite a bit of effort on numerous subjects. The problem I have is sometimes the effort does not resolve the question I have as I am reading and other times I see no effort is made on some of the tricky doctrines and paradoxes. Sometimes you will quote something that resolves a problem for you, but it does not for me. Just because he talks about the other side of an issue does not mean that he has resolves all the problems with the issue.

Dan:

"In most cases I have been able to find, Tolle goes out of the way to address the potential 'illusion point' usually within a paragraph or two of where it appears in the text although there may be a few minor examples that one must study the author's full works in order to fully understand. Thus IMO, characterizing his teachings in this manner is an unjust indictment."

JJ:

You are not correctly addressing my criticism. What I do not say cannot be unjust.

Dan:

"(3) You said 'What seems to be missing from Tolle's teachings on the present, good and evil, duality, etc., is the Second Key of Judgement.' (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Keysters/message/34253)

"I maintain that if your teachings on the law of economy/incorruption in regards to teachings is true and correct, then Tolle has not had the benefit of your teachings on the second key of knowledge and the same could be said of anyone on earth except for a few of your students. Thus, singling Tolle out in this, is an unjust indictment."

JJ:

A lot of writers I read use The Second Key even though they are unaware of my teachings on it. People basically know what good judgement means, but many mystics are very adverse to using judgement.

As I read on into his writings I see he uses more good judgement than I first thought, but there are still gaps in areas where some good application of judgement could clear things up.

Dan:

"Specifically, I object to these of your statements, some of which are stated as opinion that I simple disagree with, but others are made as statements of fact and to those I strongly object as you make no effort to supply any evidence to support your conclusions, some of which could only be truly stated as fact if gained through 'supernatural' means which though asked, you have not cited."

JJ:

Since the beginning of my teaching here I have been prepared to back up anything I state as a statement of fact. You do not cite an example here so I can't clarify further.

Dan:

"(4) 'I finally figured out in the New Heaven book that he does mention the emotional body, but just calls it the pain body.' (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Keysters/message/34221)

"This is not a true statement of fact."

JJ:

This sounded like what he was saying. Here is what he wrote:

"The playing of negative roles becomes particularly pronounced whenever the ego is magnified by an active pain body, that is to say, emotional pain from the past that wants to renew itself through experiencing more pain."

"Because of the human tendency to perpetuate old emotion, almost everyone carries in his or her energy field an accumulation of old emotional pain, which I call 'the pain body.'"

I guess we could split hairs on this but I don't think you can fault me for stating what I was discovering as I was going through the book.

Dan:

"(5) 'Elkhart Tolle considered suicide when he was younger and this was undoubtedly because of a painful emotional experience that he has not yet transcended.'  (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Keysters/message/34221)

"This is a statement of fact that you cannot possibly know 'undoubtedly' unless you received it through the soul via the Oneness Principle or Tolle himself told you."

JJ:

Tolle himself did tell us. Perhaps you would like to read it in his own words:

"That's an important point for many people to reach. That sense of deep crisis-when the world as they have known it, and the sense of self that they have known that is identified with the world, become meaningless. That happened to me. I was just that close to suicide and then something else happened...."

http://www.wie.org/j18/tolle.asp

Here is another one from an author that actually interviewed him:

"The German-born Vancouver resident says he hasn't always been so peaceful. Until his late twenties, depression, acute anxiety, and thoughts of suicide characterized his adulthood. Then one night he said, 'I can't live with myself any longer.'"

http://www.inner-growth.info/power_of_now_tolle/eckhart_tolle_s_vision_mag.htm

Most people being interviewed get to review the article for inaccuracies before it is published so if he wasn't considering suicide he could have objected.

This was from the Barnes & Noble Site:

"This is not just another candy-ass elementary level celestine prophetic conversation supposedly with God clone. It is fresh, revealing, current, new inspiration. "Power of Now" is written from a depth of a person who has considered suicide, gone through his dark night of the soul and has come out the other side into his very personal and ecstatic enlightenment. If you are considering getting back in touch with your soul this book is a great companion."

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/The-Power-of-Now/Eckhart-Tolle/e/9781577312086/?cds2Pid=16948&linkid=1103637

What makes this quote powerful evidence is that the introductory descriptions that are not a professional review at such sites as Barnes & Noble and Amazon are usually written by the author himself. I know I wrote mine at Amazon. If not the author did not, then he had someone commissioned by him do it. If Barnes & Noble are misrepresenting him he has power to correct it.

In a subsequent message that can be found at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Keysters/message/34314

JJ made the following correction to his original response to Item Number 5 above:

I misread this as you questioning the suicide itself. Yes, I should have worded it "in my opinion" rather than "undoubtedly" as a case could be made for some doubt about the transcendence.

Dan:

"(6) 'Then there are several things where he is actually speaking around true principles but comes to an erroneous conclusion.' (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Keysters/message/34253)

"This is an opinion with which I disagree."

JJ:

Last I heard I am entitled to my opinion. I think Tolle would advise you to allow me to have mine and be in peace.

Dan:

"(7) 'Tolle reinforces this paralysis that many new age people have in their actions by emphasizing that 'the present is all there is.' (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Keysters/message/34253)

"This is an opinion with which I disagree."

JJ:

Here's what Tolle says:

"What you perceive as precious is not time but the one point that is out of time: the Now. That is precious indeed. The more you are focused on time - past and future - the more you miss the Now, the most precious thing there is. Why is it the most precious thing? Firstly, because it is the only thing. IT'S ALL THERE IS."

Dan:

"(8) 'Tolle says we should not fight evil.' (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Keysters/message/34253)

"This is not a true statement of fact."

JJ:

Again, his own words:

"But beware of making it your mission to 'eradicate evil,' as you are likely to turn into the very thing you are fighting against."

"You cannot fight against the ego (source of evil) and win, just as you cannot fight against darkness. The light of consciousness is all that is necessary. You are that light."

Dan:

"(9) 'I said that he emphasized that the present is all there is and this was a correct statement.'  (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Keysters/message/34263)

"This is an opinion with which I disagree."

JJ:

See your Item Number 7.

Dan:

"(10) 'Tolle did not accept his given name that his parents wanted for him.'  (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Keysters/message/34263)

"This is a statement of fact that you cannot know unless you received it through the soul via the Oneness Principle."

JJ:

You got me. There's only a 99.99 percent chance it is true. If we have to be 100 percent sure in all our facts then none of us could say anything. Your accusations of me here are certainly far from 100 percent accurate, yet words come forth.

Remember facts are different than principles. Rarely is anyone 100 percent sure about the facts we read -- yet we all use them to the best of our ability.

Dan:

"(11) 'True he says a lot of good things, but then I see other things where he contradicts himself. Sometimes he explains the contradictions as related to the self and not self but other times he does not because they appear to be true contradictions.'  (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Keysters/message/34263)

"Since you do not state the exact contradictions, this is just an opinion with which I disagree."

JJ:

And that is fine that you disagree. I will not hold that against you. I hope you do the same for me.

Dan:

"(12) 'Like most nothingness people Tolle says there is no difference between good and evil and the best thing to do is to ignore anything going on as nothing means anything for in the end everything will be as if it never was and we will just merge with the whole and lose our identity.'  (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Keysters/message/34244)

"That Tolle is a 'nothingness' person, as you characterize it in this post, is not a true statement of fact. That he says there is no difference between good and evil is not a true statement of fact. That he says the best thing to do is ignore everything is not a true statement of fact."

JJ:

I spent a whole post covering the Nothingness Philosophy and Tolle. I think I backed up my point. As far as good and evil goes I've already made comments at the beginning of this post.

Dan:

"You are obviously so englamoured by your own ego (as Tolle defines it) that you are no longer seeing straight at this point - therefore, I see no reason to continue this farce."

JJ:

Sorry you feel this way. I have not changed, but I think you have. I would like to have my old friend back.